The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

DAMN! what is the problem with these Muslim organizations? If I were heading one, I'd jump at the 5 acre deal and then request this be done for all 40000 mosques in the country. In exchange, happily take 200000 acres in the neighborhood! Alas they are infected with lahori logic and mathemagicks.

Good to know however that both the bodies representing the Ajmer Dargah and Barelvi faction have come out fully welcoming the decision!

They have always won by holding out for what is not theirs by right. Logic of the Legend Of The Boss (which ends... "which proves that u don't have 2 b a brain 2 b a boss..."Why change a winning strategy, hain?

Tahir Mahmood, noted jurist and former chairman of National Minorities Commission, tells Ambika Pandit that Waqf Board should opt for a plot away from the disputed land and build a school or orphanage on it. Excerpts:

Q: How do you find theAyodhyajudgment? Has it done justice to all parties

A: The court had a Herculean task to perform. Knowing that it was dealing with an extremely sensitive matter, the court could not have adopted a bull in a China shop approach. Going strictly by the letter of the law, there certainly are loopholes in the judgment, but one should not lose sight of the fact that the court was constrained not to decide the case on a purely jurisprudential basis and had to give due weight to extra-judicial considerations.

Q: The Muslim parties are divided over seeking a review of the judgment. What do you think about it?

A: What miracle will a review do? In the Ismail Faruqi case of 1993, the Supreme Court had reaffirmed the Privy Council dictum of pre-independence days that the belief in a mosque remaining a mosque till the day of judgment is not part of the law of India. It had even mosque observed that mosque was “not an essential practice” in Islam. In the Ayodhya judgment, the court agreed that the mosque was not built by destroying a temple, that idols were surreptitiously placed in 1949, and that its demolition was unlawful, and yet it gave the decision contained in its operative part. How does one expect that a plea for review will prompt the court to change its mind?

Q: A fresh debate has started within the Muslim community whether the land being offered for the mosque should be taken or not?

A: The plot is to be either carved out of the disputed land or earmarked elsewhere in the city. In the former case, the new mosque will remain a trouble spot leading to friction, and in the latter case will serve no purpose. Not accepting the land at all will be preferable. But if it is taken, the board should opt for a plot away from the disputed land and, instead of a mosque, build a school, orphanage or old age home on it.

Q: Do you think this matter could have been resolved better and without heartburn if all parties had agreed to an out of court settlement?

A: An out of court settlement would have definitely been more graceful and dignified. The court judgment does take into account some of the terms of settlement mooted by the mediation committee but a mutual agreement without judicial imprint would have created goodwill for the minority community and led to greater social harmony.

Q: Why did the mediation committee fail in persuading the parties to an out of court settlement?

A: On religious issues, people are generally orthodox and obstinate, and in this case, both sides had adopted a rigid attitude. Eventually, only the Waqf Board agreed to the terms of settlement mooted by the mediation committee.

Q: Do you think this judgment should close the chapter? And if yes, what should be the way forward? A: The ground situation on the disputed land in Ayodhya is a fait accompli.

A makeshift temple is already there and has only to be replaced with a permanent temple. The court has taken cognizance of this reality in crafting its judgment. Those who are justifiably unhappy with it should think of ways to ensure protection of shrines in other sensitive places. The minorities should demand a complete overhaul of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, making it more deterrent. This will be the proper way forward.

Q: Do you think this matter could have been resolved better and without heartburn if all parties had agreed to an out of court settlement?

A: An out of court settlement would have definitely been more graceful and dignified. The court judgment does take into account some of the terms of settlement mooted by the mediation committee but a mutual agreement without judicial imprint would have created goodwill for the minority community and led to greater social harmony.

Q: Why did the mediation committee fail in persuading the parties to an out of court settlement?

A: On religious issues, people are generally orthodox and obstinate, and in this case, both sides had adopted a rigid attitude. Eventually, only the Waqf Board agreed to the terms of settlement mooted by the mediation committee.

Q: Do you think this judgment should close the chapter? And if yes, what should be the way forward?

A: The ground situation on the disputed land in Ayodhya is a fait accompli. A makeshift temple is already there and has only to be replaced with a permanent temple. The court has taken cognizance of this reality in crafting its judgment. Those who are justifiably unhappy with it should think of ways to ensure protection of shrines in other sensitive places. The minorities should demand a complete overhaul of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, making it more deterrent. This will be the proper way forward.

Probably not..as long as there is a will among the powers-that-be to find out what's below. I think (and I am not an expert on religious procedure) as long as the idol is moved per sanctioned, religious procedure, the temple structure can be 'repaired or refurbished'. If the final (grand-scale) temple is to be constructed at the same spot as the makeshift temple, it will (likely) replace the makeshift temple anyway and therefore they will have to dismantle the makeshift structure.

OT for this thread but one thing hugely ignored about the above dynasties was the Chola naval expeditions For that reason alone, you have names like Simhapuri (Singapore), Bali, Yogyakarta etc. thousands of miles east of India. This had about a paragraph or a page (max) in the NCERT textbook. Temple architecture in Cambodia and Indonesia (stone material and architecture and storied carved on walls show a clear basis with Indian architecture and history- including Ramayana). The NCERT focus was the area between Hindukush and Delhi to the exclusion of other areas (including far east for e.g. country of Burma= Varma= Verma. Obvious Indic influence there but no exposition of its history.). OT, so stopping.

You are confusing Maurya empire with the guptas. Both had Chandra Gupta in it, perhaps that is the reason of confusion. The dates that you quote is actually generally accepted dates for maurya as propagated by the evangelist and their commie apologist (read Romila and cong).Actually what you are confused is a bigge mystery and fight, a history that has been stolen from us. Chandra Gupta of Gupta was also called vikrmaditya. He is supposed to be around 300 ad per romila. However there is another vikramaditya (of Vikram and betal game), who has a calendar on his name which we all Hindus and GOI follow - Vikram samvat which starts 72 bc. That vikramaditya finds no mention in romila/evangelical history. That colander has survived Cesar’s and all Pope calendar. It is in fact more accurate than the current nasa calendar which needs correction every year.I would not trust the romilas of the world - they have like most liberals pathetic intelligence, logic and scientific temperament. They falsify based on agenda, plus romila is big time damaged, her forefathers from both side they sided with dental dyers of Jalis wala Bagh and other side was witness against bhagat Singh.A certified traitor, whose one member lost us 1962 under his generalship.Time to kick out all dynasties.

Poor history also acts as a boost for uninformed regionalism. During my ssb interview, I met a maharashtrian gent who was extremely proud that the maratha empire was the first in the subcontinent to use a naval force.

fanne wrote:You are confusing Maurya empire with the guptas. Both had Chandra Gupta in it, perhaps that is the reason of confusion. The dates that you quote is actually generally accepted dates for maurya as propagated by the evangelist and their commie apologist (read Romila and cong).Actually what you are confused is a bigge mystery and fight, a history that has been stolen from us. Chandra Gupta of Gupta was also called vikrmaditya. He is supposed to be around 300 ad per romila. However there is another vikramaditya (of Vikram and betal game), who has a calendar on his name which we all Hindus and GOI follow - Vikram samvat which starts 72 bc. That vikramaditya finds no mention in romila/evangelical history. That colander has survived Cesar’s and all Pope calendar. It is in fact more accurate than the current nasa calendar which needs correction every year.I would not trust the romilas of the world - they have like most liberals pathetic intelligence, logic and scientific temperament. They falsify based on agenda, plus romila is big time damaged, her forefathers from both side they sided with dental dyers of Jalis wala Bagh and other side was witness against bhagat Singh.A certified traitor, whose one member lost us 1962 under his generalship.Time to kick out all dynasties.

In South and western India and south-east Asia, it is Salivahana Saka Samvastaram which is started in 78 CE. Beginning that is celebrated as Ugadhi/Yugadhi/Gudi-padava/Vishu, etc. This calendar is widely used in those parts but any history on it not found in our history books.

fanne wrote: However there is another vikramaditya (of Vikram and betal game), who has a calendar on his name which we all Hindus and GOI follow - Vikram samvat which starts 72 bc. .

Just to put accurate information - Few items.

- Vikram Samvat which many/most (but not all) follow in India epoch is 56 BC. It is a luni/solar calendar. (Months are lunar and years are solar (sidereal year and not tropical year).

- GOI follows (officially) Shak (or Shake) samvat which is based on epoch around 72 AD . This is purely a solar (based on tropical year) calendar. - No "khsay" or "adhik" tithi/month etc - dates/months do not skip/repeat as in other Indian/Hindu calendar). (I don't know anyone except GOI - who follows this. Ordinary folks who use shak epoch used month/tithi based on gatkali/vikram etc... there are some other, less commonly, used epochs too.

- With minor exceptions all hindu calendars months/tithis are based on gatkali calculations. Some Indian states like Rajasthan start month at the beginning of full moon (purnimant) while others (like Bengal etc) start at the new-moon. (length of the year here is based on sidereal year (about 365 days 6 hours 9 minutes 10 seconds).

- GOI and most in India also follow Gregorian Calendar (Purely Solar Calendar based on tropical year = 365 days, 5 Hours, 48 Minutes and 45 seconds - about 20 minutes shorter than sidereal year). The epoch is 3000 years after Kaliyug officially started.

(Note I used purnimant month as common in Rajasthan. Here a new month starts about 15 days before some of other states )

And of course the UNIX (or techie time) = 1573759195 (Seconds after January 1, 1970, Thursday) Now by my clock

(Disclaimer: As I have no other calendar except Gregorian with me, all above is derived by my calculations and is *not* checked by any actual calendar (I live in US and at present do not have any other calendar or a panchangs and too lazy to check with wiki - I am depending mainly on my memory - learned the method to do calculations decades ago so if dates are wrong please let me know .. TIA - Dates/tithis may be off by a day or two.. as position of moon/sun calculated in USA lat/longitude are different than those use to calculate these in other places. I do have a computer so Unix time and JDN are, I think, correct.)

ricky_v wrote:Poor history also acts as a boost for uninformed regionalism. During my ssb interview, I met a maharashtrian gent who was extremely proud that the maratha empire was the first in the subcontinent to use a naval force.

and right in the heart of colaba bombay is INS Kunjali.

Take a guess as to what that name means and where it probably came from

kunj ali == beloved of god.

The establishment commemorates the name of the Kunjali Marakkars, the hereditary Chiefs of the Navy of the Zamorin of Kozhikode or Calicut, in the sixteenth century. The Marakkars organised the Malabar seamen to fight the Portuguese in many a battle between 1500 and 1600. The honorific title of Kunjali was bestowed by the Zamorin on the Commandants of his Naval force in recognition of their prowess in maritime warfare. There were four successive Kunjali Marakkars between the period 1500 and 1600 AD.

sorry about the confusing dates, yes Vikram Samvat started 56 year BC (while Georgian started 2000 years ago, when per religious belief Jesus was born). Perhaps some day I will write a post about the Calendars (Solar - West, Lunar - Arabian and Solar/Lunar/Constellation - Most Indian calendars, which one is more accurate for time keeping etc.).The point is there is no King either Chandragupta (either Mauryan or Gupta dynasty) or Vikramaditya that reigned 2000 years ago (precisely at 56BC) per historian Romila Thapar or other Evangelical historian (that mostly infest Indo studies in the west). This construct is no different than supposedly Aryan people who lived in Steppes (for which no archeological evidence exist) and had a language called Sanskrit, that eventually came to India as Aryans conquered Dravidian people of Harappa; then there is a slew of archeological sites in India, where people spoke a language - pre Sanskrit, that no one knows what that language was.The problem is, when the modern history was being written by a conquering race in 1800/1900 - THE BELIEF/science/history was that the world was created 6000 years ago, 4000 BC as per the bible (in grand total of 6 days). Every historian/Imperialist was trying to fit Indian history (we were the most ancient country in their subjugation, China was down but was not western ruled and ME had many countries who themselves were more than willing to disown their own pre Islamic history) in 4000 years. They chopped off many kings, laughed at Mahabharata and Ramayana as figment of imagination (the anointed Brown Sahib, a pappu of his time Nehru ostensibly wrote history where MB happened before RM, a person of below average intellect, who almost failed his law and never fought any case in his life). That history is waiting to be corrected.

I thought Asoka was of the Maurya dynasty and lived circa 300 BCE, hain? And I am RIGHT!!!

Ashoka the Great, was an Indian emperor of the Maurya Dynasty, who ruled almost all of the Indian subcontinent from c. 268 to 232 BCE.[6][7] The grandson of the founder of the Maurya Dynasty, Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka promoted the spread of Buddhism across ancient Asia. Considered by many to be one of India's greatest emperors, Ashoka expanded Chandragupta's empire to reign over a realm stretching from present-day Afghanistan in the west to Bangladesh in the east. It covered the entire Indian subcontinent except for parts of present-day Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala. The empire's capital was Pataliputra (in Magadha, present-day Patna), with provincial capitals at TaxilaTAKSHA SHILA and Ujjain.

Let me just point something out - because this is important and many/most people do not fully understand.Just few points - Best is to look it up, unfortunately there are many sources which are not accurate and are confusing.

This technical information is necessary if one is looking at any historic document to draw accurate conclusions.

==> The Indian Calendar Reform Committee, appointed in 1952, identified more than thirty well-developed calendars. (So there are *many* variants , and one has to be very careful examining historic documents)

-- All variants of the Surya Siddhanta calendar and were/are in use across different parts of India.

--The two calendars most widely used today are the Vikrama calendar (I am most familiar with) which is followed in Nepal as national calendar and also in the Indian regions like western and northern India and the Shalivahana or Saka calendar which is followed in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Goa.

- In 56 BC, Vikrama Samvat era was founded by the emperor Vikramaditya of Ujjain following his victory over the Sakas. Later, in a similar fashion, Satavahana king Gautamiputra Satakarni initiated the Saka era to celebrate his victory against the Sakas in the year AD 78.

N3 sorry for being dense, I am missing the question? If chandragupta was vikramaditya of maurya empire, he was grandfather of Ashoka (at least 50 years before Ashoka, so he would be born something like 300bc and not 56 bc). If the other king was chandragupta vikramaditya of gupta it would be 400 ad (all dates according to romila Thapar and her fantasies).

There are many inconsistencies like these, jagat guru Shri Shankaracharya, if you inquire in its tradition, they put shankracharya at least 1500 year before what again the ncert history tells us.

^^My apologies. I misread the graphic as the era of each empire. What it gives is how long each ruled. We are all now in agreement. It had not hit me how long these empires ruled!!! (Because I was ejikated by the same Hystery texts).Eight centuries! Ten centuries!!!!!!!

IMO Adi Sankara ***HAS**** to be waaaay before the textbooks say. And since He used to walk on the street outside my Evil 6th Coujin's ancestral home when he was a child.... Although Adi Sankara's PhD thesis was basically on how to end the Duality feud which was probably killing off all those who posted on the Vedic Forum in those dins. He was sent forth to use verbal argument instead of axes, and that was how women came to dominate Hindustan. LOOK at those EyeEffEss mohtermas wiping the floor using the Pakistani "diplos" at UN events.

Congress & Left historians like Guha , Habibs & Romila glorified only Mughal Dynasty while wiping rest of the dynasties

"All we learnt was the Mughal empire"

This seems rather exaggerated and incomplete. I remember getting a solid dose of mauryan and gupta history. Not to mention loads of Maratha history. The vijayanagar empire too go lots of pages. Less so with the Cholas. Not so much the others though. Could it have something to do with not having adequate historical records or as in the case of the ahoms, being geographically limited? I mean there is only so much you can stuff into a kids brain.

And maybe it depends upon who fixes your syllabus. The cbse is more likely to be guilty than state boards in guessing

Last edited by Cain Marko on 18 Nov 2019 06:44, edited 1 time in total.

That graphic is very confusing. 1000 years old will be misread, especially by deracinated dudes who don't know any better and who have no reference frame. I also initially went ???. I suggest changing the wording to "lasted 1000 years" or some such.

See, this is why the dinosaurs are great. They died out 65 million years ago. And their reign also lasted 65 million years (130 MYA to 65 MYA). So you can write that any way ("lasted 65 million years" or "65 million year old reign" or "65 million years ago"), and it will be technically right, for the next million years at least (until it turns to 66 million years ago).

Sort of like people born on Jan. 1st, Feb. 2nd ... Nov. 11th, Dec. 12th - they don't have to worry about whether they put the month first (the US way) or the day first (the normal way) when writing their birthdays.

But don't keep it that way in the above graphic, it doesn't quite work.

ArjunPandit wrote:Yes sir, I am very well aware of the KKM ji and can't be thankful enough to him. I have my fears about the ICHR types and the decades of ideological brainwashing....i sincerely hope my fears are misplaced...

ASI has a huge job simply cataloging and maintaining religious-historical sites. These places are scattered across India and cost money to maintain. Funding specifically for historical locations must be increased or we will forever lose these places due to lack of upkeep. The other part is collecting and maintaining artifacts of the several tens of millennia old Indian civilization. Collect, analyze, date, catalog and maintain these artifacts. ASI has its job cutout for it and needs more funds. Any other country in the world would value its civilizations artifacts much more closely. Historical or religious interpretations can be done by others.

Akash Vani used to start with "Saka Varsham zzzzzzz" after the long repeated cat-yowling and then Vande Mataram. In the days b4 it became haraam to have Vande Mataram. Something tell me that it was right after I left desh to go to Mongolia that desh went downhill. It was because they stopped the cat-yowling which used to propel me out of bed b4 6AM. Ppl became lazy, started the day late and one thing led to another. Society decayed.

Fanne,Its not Romila Thapar and gang, nothing is known about the king who started or how and why it was started. Infect the Indian history is blanked out for 3 centuries starting 1st BC to 2nd AD or there about. It’s commonly believed that India was under occupation of some foreign power during that period. This is deducted based on break in literature and change in the tone and style of the sanskrit literature.

Wasn't it Mortimer Wheeler who linked Chandragupta Maurya to around the time of Alexander, all on the basis of Megasthenes referring to a "Xandracottus"? I remember reading somewhere that there was no other reference to this Xandracottus being the Maurya emperor and could very well have been Chandra Gupta of the Gupta dynasty. This would also change the dates of various kingdoms, Buddha's lifetime, etc.

IF the whole video is of the same newsevent, then the whole drama is in Hyderabad. You'll see a icon of Charminar at the top-left for the entire video. Freeze frame at 1:37- Hyderabad police sign in background. There are other indications too.Added later: The scene looked a little familiar .....it reminded me of the Lal Masjid defense force when Gen. Musharaf was in power. Sistahs with sticks swearing to defend Lal Masjid in Pakistan.

arshyam wrote:Regarding calendars, this was a good talk to get started with.. <youtube>>MvpuC7Dg4e0

Sharing my opinion about the above;

Saw some parts but found scientifically speaking even the small part I heard , was absurd, contains basic errors and misunderstanding of even the most elementary basic facts. My advice - there are plenty of good books and teachers for those who are genuinely interested . (Saw longer written article by this author, which I could read much faster than going through the video, and stuff makes little sense - some part outright wrong - even the difference between tropical vs sidereal year he does not understand (It has nothing to do with 'Coriolis force' or earth's spin but perturbation in earth's orbit which causes precession of equinoxes.OT - (May be in physics dhaga)

IF the whole video is of the same newsevent, then the whole drama is in Hyderabad. You'll see a icon of Charminar at the top-left for the entire video. Freeze frame at 1:37- Hyderabad police sign in background. There are other indications too.Added later: The scene looked a little familiar .....it reminded me of the Lal Masjid defense force when Gen. Musharaf was in power. Sistahs with sticks swearing to defend Lal Masjid in Pakistan.

AIMPLB to challenge SC verdict on AyodhyaAIMPLB was never party in the original case of Rama Janmabhoomi. But whether they now get a chance to file a review petition and whether the court will allow them is a matter to be seen. In the Sabari Mala case (which was all about Fundamental rights) one strong argument put by Adv. Parasaran was that "In a civil case between A and B, if the verdict to be issued also effects C; then C also should be given a chance to be heard and plead in the case". Don't know if this would also apply in the case of Ayodhya (which was a land title dispute).

SriKumar wrote:Yes, I meant 'Hyderabad' in India, not Pakistan. THere are other indications in the video that clearly put it in Hyderabad, Telangana.

If it is in Hyderabad, Telengana then off course this would be an attempt by Shri. Owaisi brothers. Remenants of the old Razakkars would be there even today. And in a way it is good to see such "protests". Because this is only going to solidify the majority community with the demand to build a temple really quick getting more prominence. Think about it; is there any thing new in what they were saying? This has always been the mindset. Now it is just coming out in the open, that is all.